The MPLS WG Archive

[Scott Reynolds <Scott_Reynolds@pmc-sierra.com>]

All:

>From Neil's comments below, it appears that either operators view MPLS as a way to deliver superior IP-based services, or as a converged backbone, supporting ATM, FR and IP based services. This second group of operators appear to want a set of operational tools "similar" to those offered by other layered networking technologies, because they believe they will be facing the same problems with MPLS as technology X. 

neil> George, you should take careful note that operators also have lots of major
neil> revenue earning FR and ATM services out there, and maybe new services.  It
neil> would be really nice for operators to have/see MPLS as that convergence
neil> technology......not as a set of disparate 'vendor fixes' for specific
neil> problems.  For example, I could very easily see operators running FR/ATM,
neil> BE/Internet and MPLS/VPN platforms all disjoint and with no obvious
neil> convergence strategy...and that is exactly what I can see today.

Providing a form of MPLS OAM will result in a cost burden, which the operators justify based on the belief that end customers now do and will continue to pay a premium for ATM and FR based services because of the guarantees the operators can offer because of these tools.

I don't believe anyone supporting the MPLS OAM activities has demanded that supporting MPLS OAM be mandatory. If you don't want it, can't afford it or just don't like it then leave it off. 

If we have a group of users who have determined a need for the tools, the appearance of unsatisfied requirements with the current set of tools and a group of people willing to develop new tools, why is there so much resistance ? 

Regards,
Scott

--
Scott Reynolds,
Senior Architect,  
PMC-Sierra, Inc.
8555 Baxter Place, 
Burnaby, B.C, Canada V5A 4V7
ph:  		(604) 415-6000 x 2593
fax: 		(604) 415-6659
e-mail: 	mailto:scott_reynolds@pmc-sierra.com
web:		http://www.pmc-sierra.com